SEC Must Adapt A Nine Game Conference Schedule--Or Else.
by War Eagle Atlanta on Feb 14, 2012 8:46 AM CST
Email
Print
The 800-lb gorilla in the conference since the one-off 2012 SEC football schedule was released is the looming 2013 schedule. Many wonder how might the conference deal with two more teams without upsetting the delicate balance of 20 years of divisional rivalry precedent mixed with preserving some of the sport's most traditional match ups. With existing and new members yet to sit down and carve out a brave, new 14-team world, many questions lingering about the future of the SEC came to a head last week with Georgia AD Greg McGarrity's comments about the possible ending of the South's Oldest Rivalry on an annual basis. Nothing like a little blasphemy to get the blogs churning.
Most of us fans in the region are still wondering why the conference leaders ever wanted to expand in the first place, with all the success we've enjoyed of late. You can't convince us it was preventative in nature. Nothing short of welding two BCS conferences together could have competed with the SEC for the forseeable future. If you're like me, you think money was the ultimate goal, because apparently, the preservation of the conference's tradition and heritage may have been the first casualties of expansion.
With this topic likely to dominate the SEC spring meetings, it would behoove fans and administrations alike to speak with one voice regarding the topic, or the SEC applecart could be upset for generations. Nothing against Missouri or Texas A&M, but you guys made the choice to jump. Mind us long standing members for a moment while we figure this out and don't think it rude if we close the door while we talk.
There is no other solution to this mess than to play a nine-game conference schedule. You play your six division mates once, one permanent cross divisional rival and two rotators. N I N E games. Yea, that leaves three out-of-conference games left, leaving precious little room for cupcakes. The sport may even contract by a regular season game eventually if we get a playoff, leaving even less room, especially for schools who have long-standing OOC rivals, like Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, and the new kids--if they wish to make amends and pick up series with Texas and Kansas again.
Who cares? This is what the powers that be wanted--the SEC playing more SEC. Now live with it. Most fans don't like the cupcake games anyway, and a future playoff scenario might mandate additional OOC BCS games, so the SEC will definitely be in compliance. It only makes running the table and going undefeated that much harder, but what does that matter when the SEC conference champ is a virtual lock for the BCS title game anyway? Don't fret, SEC. Remember, this is what you wanted. Think of all the TV dollars: $$$$$$$$
What are the alternatives to going to a nine-game schedule? Sticking with eight would mean six divisional games and two rotators, because one rotator would mean waiting eleven years to play the other teams and you just can't legitimately call yourself a conference if that's the way it's going to be,
With eight games you can't split into three divisions, because that's not allowed and I'm pretty sure the math doesn't work out with whole numbers. Besides, it would produce one hell of a complicated conference title scenario.
You can't have any more teams jumping divisions because there is balance and new found rivalry to maintain. The time for that was long ago. Yes, Auburn, I'm talking to YOU. I'm not sure I'd want to forgo Alabama even to pick back up Tennessee and Florida and to preserve Georgia. Choices like that are impossible.
You couldn't have rotating divisions, with two teams switching sides every few years. Or could you? Could the loss of Auburn-Georgia, Alabama-Tennessee and LSU-Florida on an annual basis be mitigated by having them at least play four-six times a decade? Working out that round-robin would be crazy, and even crazier might be some team with east and west division champs banners flying in their stadium.
No, there's only one solution to the mess we find ourselves currently in, and that's to go to a nine-game conference schedule. I can't even believe any rational person would suggest sticking at eight and losing out on all these traditional rivalries. You broke it, SEC. Now you fix it.
36 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
WEA... nice write up but I have some intriguing news...
Did you know we had a State champ QB from Hoover High ‘walk on’ at AU to compete for a starting QB job?? Again… he is currently a walk on… but….
This is HUGE news (IMO). Why? It means something is up with our QBs. . Perhaps Clint didn’t care to being fodder last year? His attitude at times has been suspect. One thing is for certain… we are back at the drawing board when it comes to who starts. Competition is going to be feirce. I think Leoffler is sending a message already. Better bring your best or someone else will start.
Ryan Carter is the new kids name. From what I can find… this guy graduated Hoover High School in 2011. He was in the 2011 recruiting class and apparrently didn’t take football seriously. He is 6’2" and is a pro-style QB.
Year Games Rushing TD Yds Passing TD
2009 (Jr.) 15 5 3,209 34
No fan fare… just a quiet news posting on AUSPORTS.
WDE
"Negative? Hell's bells. I can out drink anyone in the kool-aide department. But I also like to be realistic. Don't you?"
Why is a walk-on
that nobody wanted last year “huge news”? And what did it have to do with the blog above?
Are you the police or something?
Seriously… football news is what it is. You take it when you can get it.
WDE
"Negative? Hell's bells. I can out drink anyone in the kool-aide department. But I also like to be realistic. Don't you?"
No, you're free to
comment as you please. Just had nothing to do with the above blog, and as noted, it was covered Friday.
Appreciate it!
And news is where you find it.
WDE
"Negative? Hell's bells. I can out drink anyone in the kool-aide department. But I also like to be realistic. Don't you?"
We actually covered this in our Friday Ramblings...
He spurned a scholarship offer to Illinois, to walk on at AU.
He said he wants to play for Auburn, so he requested a tryout, and Coaches Chizik and Loeffler said he made the team.
Come and join me at http://trackemtigers.com
It's not big news...
It’s just football news at a time of year, when there is very little actual football news.
Come and join me at http://trackemtigers.com
Sorry KB... I didn't get to read or commment on Friday's ramblings...
I would have commented there if I had the time.
But I still think it is significant. Sorry others don’t.
To me… taking a walk on at QB… at a position that normally reserves a scholly or two or three in order to get the most talent possible for a team is pretty big news. Heck, this year – we spent two schollys on kids for this position. Personally – that he has already tried out… I think it is sending a statement to the ones that you have: step up your game.
And while some may disparage the kid because he wasn’t highly pursued by others (ok, Illinois isn’t your big time program) its a bit too hypocritical. Obviously folks don’t realize that Hoover Football has a BIG TIME highschool impact in the state of Alabama 6A football.
Looking at his numbers… I don’t think they are too shabby. Proud to have him in our orange and blue.
So yeah… big news. Wahoo!
WDE
"Negative? Hell's bells. I can out drink anyone in the kool-aide department. But I also like to be realistic. Don't you?"
JMHO, YMMV...
You let a kid like this walk on, and it takes up no scholarship. Nothing lost if he can’t play. If he can, great, and you give him a ride when he proves he can. As for what it says about our QB situation? Well, I think we all know that’s up in the air now, and taking this kid really means nothing one way or the other. Just another one added to the mix that is way down in the pecking order. He’ll get a look, but the scholarship guys will be the likely ones to get the most work time in order to compete. This kid will have to really stand out to work his way in to the mix of Pike, Frazier, Mosley, and the Fr. coming in from Phenix City whose name I can’t call now.
Loeffler doesn't strike me as a guy that...
jerks folks around. This kid already tried out and was told – come on. Your point is valid… but I think the statement still stands – AU is moving forward. You either get on board and demonstrate you can make it at the next level and lead a team… or you can stand on the sidelines.
In fact, just to kind of drive this home, according to AUSports we are targeting another top ranked pro-style QB next year that is currently pledged to TA&M. The kid is gushing over how Loeffler helped Tom Brady.
AU isn’t going to sit still and take what we get. I think things just got thrown up a notch.
Still – the proof is in the pudding. But to me the funny thing about the pecking order…. I think they are all on the same level – GROUND ZERO. I mean, can you honestly say that the position is Clint Mosely’s to lose?
I think the guy your talking about is Jonathan Wallace.
WDE
"Negative? Hell's bells. I can out drink anyone in the kool-aide department. But I also like to be realistic. Don't you?"
We did
kind of gang up on you….on Valentine’s Day and everything…
So here you go:
"We see the door; we're here to knock it down"-Cam Newton
by Tiger on the mountain on Feb 14, 2012 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
OR
It just means that the scholly QB didn’t like the looks of the new Fighting Illini O, and decided to return closer to home…..I don’t think that it’s a dead ringer that ‘something is up with our QBs’. Give Sparkey his tin foil hat back…..I’m sure that he’s missing it.
"We see the door; we're here to knock it down"-Cam Newton
by Tiger on the mountain on Feb 14, 2012 9:01 AM CST up reply actions
It's a Xs and Os thing
You might not understand.
2011 Chicken Bowl Champs!
by War Eagle Atlanta on Feb 14, 2012 9:55 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
legit question
You clearly have no answer.
by OL_Coach on Feb 14, 2012 10:44 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
The reasoning is outlined in the article
Hit me up on Google+
by jd is legend on Feb 14, 2012 12:44 PM CST up reply actions
It's really the only way to keep the aforementioned..
….traditions going, without relegating other cross-divisional series to a once a decade occurrence. No, they don’t HAVE to go to 9 games. Heck, they don’t HAVE to have a football season. But I’m thinking the powers that be in school board rooms will end up with something very like what WEA has proposed above.
…..In the SEC, football is a HUGE financial engine that drives contribution to academic endeavors outside the athletic department. Tuition and state money barely pay the bills. For a school to keep pace with the world in terms of facilities and such, it must rely on gifts. And if the powers that be monkey too much with tradition, it’s going to hurt the bottom line, I think without question. Sure, expanded TV markets will mean more money. But it’s nothing compared to those gifts from folks like Miller Gorrie.
......Drowning in cool elixir.
SEC execs & expansion
suck. Who besides me is in favor of contraction? Has a conference ever kicked out members (besides Big East – Temple)? I would love to go back to 10 members. I’m sure contraction won’t happen, but I would vote for it.
I honestly don't think a 9 game schedule will hurt any SEC school...
Most play 12 games a season now, and if a playoff is added to the NCAA schedule it would only add one more game, and potentially, one more home game.
Come and join me at http://trackemtigers.com
This is the thinking of the Presidents
Home games generate upwards of $10Million or more in ticket and ad revenue and game day money spent depending on the school. Thats a HUGE impact on the community and in revenue generation for the school that is not replaceable in any way.They don’t want a 9 game schedule because they will lose a home game every other year.
Most years you have a 7-5 split on home vs away games with OOC games thrown in the mix. Auburn normally finds a way to have an 8-4 split in even years, although this year we have a nuetral site game in the Dome vs. Clemson. With a nine game conference slate, you could end up with a dreaded 6-6 schedule or a permanent 7-5 schedule. That would defeinitely mean the death of any home and home OOC match-ups which rules out a name opponent of any consequence. But hey, we’ll get to play Missouri every now an again!! YIPPEE!
Also there is some blather that a 9 game schedule adds 7 losses to the SEC’s strength of schedule component in the BCS raninkings. While thats true, I don’t see that as overriding the benefit of playing an extra quality team per school. Thats more spinning IMO
I love the smell of Auburn in the autumn.....it smells like....victory.
I don't know how I missed this yesterday...
According to a report from Al.com, Martinez was in Auburn Monday meeting with the Tigers’ coaching staff, although the university hasn’t officially released news of his hire yet.
As Georgia’s defensive coordinator, Martinez’s defenses sixth in 2006 and 14th nationally in total defense in 2007. In two years at Oklahoma, the Sooners ranked eighth and 23rd in the country in pass efficiency defense despite playing in the Big 12, which has produced some of the nation’s best quarterbacks over the last couple of years.
Read more here: http://www.wareagleextra.com/2012/02/14/willie-martinez-emerges-as-the-leading-candidate-to-replace-lolley/#storylink=cpy
Come and join me at http://trackemtigers.com
A very special Valentines...
Come and join me at http://trackemtigers.com
by KoolBell777 on Feb 14, 2012 8:38 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Shouldn't that shirt be grey?
Thats a good one.
Can you imagine being married to him?
I love the smell of Auburn in the autumn.....it smells like....victory.
I'm with WEA.
Everyone screaming for us to move to the East…it’s wasted energy. The time for that move is long gone….at least until we add the next two teams (shudder).
My hope is that the collective outcry from the fanbases (by my count there’s 6 of us with legitimate gripes). The loss of AU-UGA, UA-UT, LSU-UF can’t happen. At least I don’t want to be forced to imagine a football season without them. A&M and Mizzou chose to blow up their rivalries. I don’t know if we have a choice in whether we keep ours or not. But we don’t have to walk gracefully down that road. We need to protest loudly with meaning and impact.
Nut Up, Slive, we’re comin’ to get ya!
"We see the door; we're here to knock it down"-Cam Newton
by Tiger on the mountain on Feb 14, 2012 8:58 AM CST reply actions
I disagree
They didn’t choose to blow their rivalries. Texa$ and KU blew them up. Mizzou and Aggie wanted a came liked UGA/GT, USCe/Climpson. I agree that traditional rivalries MUST be maintained. This is why I’ve argued for a 9 conference game season from the beginning.
Yeah, it will likely end up decreasing our OOC schedule in quality, with Aggie taking the role of the decent team we play (GT, Climpson, WVU in recent history). I am fine with that, but you are right that the traditional rivalries must be maintained.
by SEC Supremacist on Feb 14, 2012 9:02 AM CST up reply actions
I disagree
TAMU & Mizzou did choose to blow up their rivalries as soon as they decided to go to the SEC. While I literally hate TU for what they have done to screw up college football for the almighty dollar; I do not blame them one bit for not changing their out of conference schedule to accomodate A&M. TU is saying screw you little brother, take your ball & go play in your new sandbox.
BTW, I hope both A&M and Mizzou go 0-8 in the confernence next year.
Mizzou stands a decent chance of winning the east.
Especially if they can take down UGA at home. Aggie will go 2-6 in conference, beating the Mississippis. I can’t blame them for jumping the sinking ship that is the Big 12-1-1+1+1. Aggie had already left and Mizzou had to jump ship, given that everyone else was looking elsewhere (OU/TX/OSU to Pac12, KU/KSU to anywhere they could go).
The Big Equation won’t exist in 10 years. I think it’s best for college football, getting quality teams to play eachother.
by SEC Supremacist on Feb 14, 2012 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
Exactly.
TAMU & Mizzou did choose to blow up their rivalries as soon as they decided to go to the SEC.
"We see the door; we're here to knock it down"-Cam Newton
by Tiger on the mountain on Feb 14, 2012 10:27 AM CST up reply actions
The argument against a nine-game schedule that says we only get three OOC games is pretty weak
Not too long ago, the season was only eleven games, and the SEC had an eight-game schedule. That leaves, gasp!, three OOC games. The teams with OOC rivalries somehow managed to make it work then, I’m sure they can make it work now.
In 2005, Georgia played an eleven-game regular season schedule with OOC games against Boise State and traditional rival Georgia Tech (as well as filler game La-Monroe). It worked out for them, as they won the SEC East.
Similarly, South Carolina played Boise State and Clemson (and Wofford) OOC in 2001, and won nine games.
It can be done. The administrators (Auburn’s likely included) are simply afraid of losing cupcake sure victory games. It’s pathetic.
Hit me up on Google+
9-game schedules makes the most sense...
… but it hurts two movements that were just gaining momentum in college football.
(1) a true college football playoff (at least 8 teams): expanding the conference schedule will give playoff opponents more ammo. Increasing the toughness of regular-season schedules, when top teams already play a conference championship game, makes the possibility of a real playoff even further away. Remember, two teams a year would actually play 10 SEC games!
(2) strong non-conference matchups: as much as the BCS is flawed, before it arrived, way too many big-six conference teams played all cupcakes in non-conference (which sucked for fans). After Auburn in 2004, everyone learned that you better play at least one big-time non-conference game per year. An extra SEC game could easily replace a strong non-conference game for schedule strength and the fans will begin to lose exciting non-conference matchups (e.g., AU vs Clemson).
- The new SEC will still be great… but the face of college football is changing. The outlook would be much brighter if you could trust the money-hungry suits to do whats best for anyone besides themselves.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
